Hi John,

 

It feels a bit odd to try and reply ‘on behalf of the AWG’ to…

So HOT activation group can you first inspect the instructions and then confirm 
with the project managers to see if we can reduce the possibility of different 
interpretations?  ie keep them as simple as possible.

But I think what you’re trying to address is a bit of a training/communication 
thing; each Project is created by an individual account that has 
permission/privilege on whatever instance of the Tasking Manager the project is 
created on. The main HOT instance for example has somewhere around 100 
people/accounts that can create projects there. In order to try and get ‘better 
instructions’ we have set-up a mailing list for everyone to communicate 
(tm-project-managers@) and ideally we’ll get some great training via courses@ 
and LearnOSM.  In other words, we really do need to create some ‘best 
practices’ for making the most efficient projects for the desired result, but 
some of that needs to be HOT/Disaster specific and some should be more broad to 
help those running other instances of the Tasking Manager – such as TeachOSM.

 

Anyway, great discussion – just trying to direct some action – it is on the 
Activation WG Trello to ‘further utilize’ the tm mailing list, training, etc.

 

=Russ

 

From: john whelan [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:19 AM
To: Daniel Specht
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

 

So to clarify what you're saying is the project instructions should be much 
more precise.  The project managers should ask for precisely what is needed 
rather than we'd like everything since when we are imprecise different mappers 
and validators interpret the instructions differently.  Also asking for 
everything takes away resources from other projects.

So HOT activation group can you first inspect the instructions and then confirm 
with the project managers to see if we can reduce the possibility of different 
interpretations?  ie keep them as simple as possible.

Would it be an idea to go over the "abandoned" projects iethose that have been 
around for more than a year and see if by reducing the requested instructions 
we can at least get the highways and the major landuse=residential areas in?

Cheerio John

_______________________________________________
HOT mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Reply via email to